Everything good in all of human action comes from such aloneness -- from the man who faces reality alone, who weighs the truth or falsehood of his convictions with a regard for nothing but fact, who is dedicated to the uncompromising conviction that he must concern himself not with men, but with what is right (i.e., what corresponds to reality). It can require inordinate bravery to abandon the false comfort of what others think and concern oneself with the autonomous grasp of what is true.

Thank you.
Do you consider Rand's "Reason is the faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses" to be a description or a definition, and if a description, what would you offer as a definition?

"Reason is the faculty by which man grasps truth. Logic is the instrument of reason, the means by which it operates."
Is this entirely true, and are these definitions valid? Do objections come to mind?

From not being mine. When I pluck a banana from a tree existing in the state of nature, i.e. "[mix my] labour" with it, as Locke wrote, it becomes my own, regardless of whether other men are present. In other words, to speak of property, and to speak of property rights, are different things entirely. One does acquire all valid property rights when a thing becomes one's property, but these only become necessary when other men appear. (Wynand spoke of the example of buying a cheap ashtray, which, when he acquired it, gained a certain quality.)
Locke also wrote, "every man has a property in his own person...." Even were other men not present, wouldn't you consider your body still yours, and distinguished fundamentally from other things in the world that are not so?

I would value your thoughts on this; be well. -- The most fundamental concern of any man is that of values. As Ayn Rand writes: “There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or non-existence—and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of life is not: it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is indestructible, it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death. Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action. If an organism fails in that action, it dies; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes out of existence. It is only the concept of ‘Life’ that makes the concept of ‘Value’ possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil.” (For the New Intellectual) For any man who would seek to remain in existence, values are his most important concern. The issue of values is the most important one of a man’s existence, for it is upon them that his life itself depends. It is from this fact that the primary character traits of human beings derive, and they are: Confidence and Insecurity. These are the most fundamental character traits as they relate to the most fundamental issue of man’s life on earth; they are the traits that follow from what makes life possible. And as values are his first and highest concern, his grasp on whether they are secure or not so is the first and highest influence upon his character. There are five primary areas in which values can be categorized: Environmental, Cognitive, Moral, Procedural, and Social. Environmental values relate to the safety of a man’s person and property — a rational man thus, for example, values rational government, which provides this to him. Cognitive values relate to a man’s ability to grasp truth, the foundation of all that he is. Moral values relate to a man’s judgment of moral worth, both his own and that of the men who surround him — he thus values rational ethics, and knows especially the importance of grasping his own moral value, the foundation of his motivation to continue life itself. Procedural values relate to a man’s ability to act successfully — a rational man thus values the knowledge and experience that allows him to do so. Finally, Social values relate to others — friends, love, and confidence of his own value in a social context; a good man grasps that should those around him not grasp his value, the fault is in them, and not in him. In each of these areas, a man’s grasp of his values may be secure, or not so. In the former case, he experiences confidence — in the latter case, he experiences insecurity. The emotional corollary of confidence is inner peace -- the physical corollary, calm. The emotional corollary of insecurity is anxiety -- the physical corollary, nervousness. To the extent a man is confident, it is because he is sure of his values in any given area; to the extent he is insecure, he is not so.

I take it then there is a significant distinction between saying "I have a right to this lamp, as I have purchased it" and "This lamp is my property". Rights concern one's relation to other men, and freedom of action in that regard within the context of rational law. It is different then to say "It is mine" and "I have a right to it," though the latter is implied in the former. Is that right?

This will likely become part of a (much?) longer poem, that will describe a child's dedication to Reason. Poetry has not been a priority for me in recent years; other concerns predominated, and I am now planning to pursue further formal study in psychology, as well as focusing on other forms of literature. Nevertheless I hope you enjoy such as may come, when they do so. -- The first thought I recall is this -- That two and two were four; And that as long as time endured, 'Twould be no less, no more.

Re Lenin: bottom-dwelling life-hater. A fitting memorial to all such men, in the world to come, including Lenin, and Hitler, and Kant: let their portraits and, where applicable, a copy of their major works, be placed in the central incoming pipelines to, as a matter of principle, all of the world's sewage treatment facilities.